The mods will let this thread stay, but the Macaulay Culkin thread had to be deleted. This world is not right. Macaulay Culkin needs to be destroyed.

>>65243
Do you think Barack Obama eats Michelle Obama's pussy out?

>>65245
It's the decent thing to do.

The sexual generosity of our commander and chief should never be questioned.

This pic will probably get the site shut down and the admins placed on a watch list but I find the image mildly amusing so I'ma gonna go for it.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/jonstone/foreign-jihadi-fighters-in-iraq-and-syria-keep-tweeting-pict#4fsw6lw

https://news.vice.com/article/isis-fighters-and-their-friends-are-total-social-media-pros

If you follow the twitters of ISIS fighters just for the cat pictures do you think you can get put on an fbi watchlist

>>65259
There's something very wrong with the vice twitter viewing thing. This one's from the "Disastrous #myNYPD Twitter" article but the jihad ones are similar.

>>65253
>commander and chief

>>65264
Well when you think about it "commander in chief" makes no sense whatsoever.

>>65266
Actually, if you are smart and think about it, you will know that "in-chief", or "en chef" in the French, is simply an abbreviated form of "in the position of chief" and makes perfect sense.

>>65269
No, not really. That's information that you would have to be provided in some capacity. "Commander in chief" sounds like you're putting one position inside of another, putting authority inside of authority to differentiate from other, lower authority figures. In which case you could just use "and" rather than "in".

But as usual something completely nonsensical and confusing about the English language has its roots in the fucking French.

>>65270

>Yo, I'm commander X.
>Ayo, I'm commander Y.
>I'm commander Z.
>I'm the commander in chief.

Which of the above is in charge?

>>65288
If you're the proverbial super-logical alien that works only in literals, you wouldn't know. That's my point. You'd have to tell him about the history and origins of the term in order to have him understand it. That's my point, it's not a logical term meant to describe the top dawg, it's some nonsensical French medieval bullshit. Abbreviations and condensing of certain terms are meant to be obvious in English, and usually come with a apostrophe, but even those need to be explained/are quirks of the language.

>>65290

I disagree, given definitions of only the words commander, in, I, am and chief, it seems reasonable to assume that commander in chief is the highest rank.

Let's break it down to algebra.
X = lots
A = top
I = me
in = belonging to
am = possess

I AM X
>me possess lots

I AM X IN A
>me possess lots belonging to top

It seems fairly clear that XA > X, but really this is a pointless discussion because we can define the knowledge of the outside observer to be anything we wish to fit our own agenda, just like I have done in this post.

I suppose the underlying message here is "watch more TV/read more books" and it is aimed at the cretin who used the phrase "commander and chief."

>>65291
"In" has a very clearly defined meaning. It can be applied to a wide variety of contexts, but this is not one of them. You cannot put a rank inside of another rank, that's absurd. It only makes sense when you explain that it has origins in a completely different language and is an condensed form of a phrase than no one uses. A completely objective observer would have to be explained this history and context. In the offending post (>>65269), it is stated that if one were to "think about it", they could deduce why it is "commander in chief" despite that not making any sense. "Thinking about it" suggests that one would be able to logically work out a phrase or word with no more provided information.

So the assertion is that, just by looking at it, one would be able to discern the full context and history of the term "commander in chief". One might be able to discern its meaning, but that is not what is being debated here, but rather why an alternate, more logical term is not used in its stead.

>>65294
Are you intentionally being a dumbass at this point just to frustrate us? Since you refuse to believe any of us, assuming you aren't just ding around, go google the dictionary definition of "in" and then apologize to all of us.

"Commander and chief" changes the meaning slightly as well, you fuckshit.

I hate it when I fart and it slides up my vaginal slit before escaping.

>>65296
Don't cry just because you can't refute me. You wouldn't say "she's such a bitch-in-cunt". That makes no goddamn sense. You can't use adjectives like that. Show me one other phrase where it's acceptable.

"He is a commander currently filling (or 'in') the role of chief."

Languages have lots of weird implied shit. I was learning about conditional mood in Italian and I didn't get it at first, I was like conditional of what? But we do the same thing in English. We say "I would like some of that". Technically it's an incomplete conditional but it's kind of implied we mean "I would like that, if you'd give it to me". Language is weird.

Preposition trouble

>>65298
does it tickle ur clit and turn u on but only some times?

nope